Tuesday, April 28, 2009

The capacity to ask the right questions (semester Roundup)

Well, I have to say, I am very pleased with another of Dr. Sexson's stimulating classes. It seems a lot has changed on my end since i had American Lit II three and a half years ago and vowed to never take another class from Dr. S again.

Of all of the aspects of the entire semester, I have to say Frances Yates' book effected me the most.  I am quite convinced that "The Art of Memory" is one of the best books I have ever read. I have never really gotten into scholarly writing like in Memory but I believe that will be changing.  I will probably reread the book this summer to get a better grasp on the concepts outlined by Yates.  That is of course. After I finish Yates' other book Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition and maybe even a translation of the Corpus Hermeticum.

I wasn't kidding when I said the entire class finally made sense to me as I sat thinking about what I should present for my Individual presentation. I wish I could rewrite and revise my paper again with a little less painkiller influence. The connections between the three parts of class, Memory, Orality, and Myth are freakish. Bruno is the key that ties them together so completely and I just didn't quite realize it until 30 seconds before my presentation. To be quite honest, reading Bruno makes me want to drop everything and devote all of my time to discovering the Divine Mind. I am pretty convinced it exists. Though reaching Bruno's divine mind may be nearly impossible, with some properly devoted study it may be nearly attainable.  I can only imagine the possibilities with even 5% of the capability of the Divine Mind. 

Overall, I believe it important to note that we've discussed all natures of communication, from orality, to literacy, to hypertextuality and back again.  For me it is not a competition as to which is superior. The true interest is how we got to where we are and where is it going. The development of language comes at a price of loosing parts of the older method but that older method continues to exist on a more subtle level. 

Reading Rich's paper, I begin to think in our entire semester dealing with the shift from Orality-Literacy-Hypertextuality we forgot a step.  The crucial step that comes before Orality.  How did we get that far. I happen to like Rich's and Darwin's opinions on the subject matter. Orality began with communication with the earth and the natural rhythms of the earth. If we believe that this conversation started nearly 100,000 years ago, Its interesting to think what capability for knowledge these primeval people had. Especially since 100,000 years later a man named Bruno wrote that the Divine Mind originates in a conversation with the world. Either way, all knowledge seems to come from our ability to process and store conversation. The medium for the conversation is irrelevant.  This class is an excellent example. I had a great conversation with Frances Yates, I picked up a few tidbits from both Ong and Kane, and every now and then I understood lecture. But the knowledge I gained from theses conversations is almost limitless.  Like I said, even up to the moment I made my presentation the conversation continued to dump knowledge on me.  Its fascinating.  Knowledge comes from the process of the conversation. I know I'm going to sound like a broken record by saying this but the processing capability lies in the Memory and Imagination. Conversations get ordered in the Memory and Imagination then the Soul connects the dots.  The Dots can come from any compartment in the Memory and imagination and once connected presto the foundations of knowledge.  The common conception of the brain is an infinite lattice work of synapes and braincells.  Its the worlds most complex connect the dots puzzle. Though not an impossible one, unlocking this puzzle requires a powerful capacity to order the dots an and even more powerful capacity to converse with the world (people, nature, animals, universe) and ask the right questions.

Thanks for another great semester Dr. Sexson, I look forward to running across you again.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Final Paper Completed

Kevin Luby

English 337 Oral Traditions

Dr. Sexson

The Memory, Imagination, and Soul of Mythtelling

Sean Kane writes in his novel Wisdom of the Mythtellers “[…] myths were not merely flights of the imagination; they were flights of the spirit, with the narrative acting as the conduit of supernatural energies summoned and made present by story, and the mythteller acting as the conductor of the souls of the listeners” (104).  But why did mythtellers control such power?  Paraphrasing Aristotle, Frances Yates writes “memory…belongs to the same part of the soul as imagination; it is a collection of mental pictures form sense impressions but with a time element added, for the mental images of memory are not from perception of things present but of things past” (33).  In an oral tradition, storytellers held the key to personal development, morally, socially, and spiritually.  They molded the youth of the tribe.  They taught future leaders, future shaman, and future farmers the knowledge needed to survive in a threatening world.  Stories capture the imagination, and according to Aristotle, imagination connects with memory.  Both memory and imagination lie in the soul and as a result, the storyteller’s guidance of the soul becomes the single greatest influence on the development of the mind.

  Myths teach people how to interact with the world.  “Exchange with the world is made at the mouth, nose, ears, eyes, anus, sexual organs, and the skin itself” (Kane 103).  Before print, myths were used to teach children about poisonous berries, the weather, planting crops, and medical uses for plants.  These myths appealed to the imagination as colorful characters acted as the guinea pigs of the natural world.  For example excess pride will cause downfall as in the story of Icarus.  Myths remain in the collective consciousness of the tribe and teach important lessons of development and survival.  Initially, these stories guided developing souls by means of imagination and memory however, the mythteller’s true gift extends beyond practical knowledge.  The storyteller and his myths play a crucial part in the development of all knowledge.

Paraphrasing Plato, Yates writes:

The Phaedrus is a treatise on rhetoric in which rhetoric is regarded, not as an art of persuasion to be used for personal or political advantage, but as an art of speaking the truth and of persuading hearers to the truth.  The power to do this depends on knowledge of the soul and the soul’s true knowledge consists in the recollection of the Ideas.  Memory is not a ‘section’ of this treatise as one part of the art of rhetoric; memory in the Platonic sense is the groundwork of the whole. (37)

 

Plato’s theory of forms states that all knowledge comes hardwired into the brain upon birth.  Accessing this information requires little more than the proper thought or more specifically, proper remembrance.  Truth depends on the knowledge of the soul and its two main aspects, memory and imagination.  If truth lies in the soul, then the person responsible for developing the soul holds the key to knowledge.  Enter the mythteller and his true purpose in mythtelling.  Because myths develop the memory and imagination, they offer the gateway to not just practical knowledge but all knowledge of the past, present, and still to come.  A well developed memory and imagination allows access to the knowledge described by Plato in his theory of forms.  Cicero argues for the power of memory and imagination, “assuredly nothing can be apprehended even in God of greater value than this … Therefore the soul is, as I say, divine, as Euripides dares say, God …” (Yates 47).  Thus, the power imparted by an oral mythteller through his stories surpasses the power of God.  Stories that teach what is, what was, and what will be empower a human with the divine, which explains why religion roots in myth and storytellers become demi-gods.

Several centuries later, Giordano Bruno echoes the ideas of Plato and Aristotle:

"Since the divine mind is universally present in the world of nature the process of coming to know the divine mind must be through the reflection of the images of the world of sense within the mens.  Therefore the function of the imagination of ordering the images in memory is an absolutely vital one in the cognitive process. Vital and living images will reflect the vitality and life of the world--and he has in mind both magically vitalized astral images and the living striking images of the 'Ad Herennian' memory rule (Yates 259)"

 

By viewing the “mens” described by Bruno as the soul, we gain an even clearer picture of the powerful trinity developed by Aristotle and Plato. "As the world is said to be the image of God, so Trismegistus does not fear to call man the image of the world [...] man is the 'great miracle' [...] his mens is divine (Yates ???)” The ordered arrangement of the images in the memory creates the divine mind and joins with the divine consciousness of the world.  According to Bruno, the world is another entity with whom we converse. Humans build and share knowledge with the world just as we would with each other. The myths of oral storytellers create the dialogue with the earth that taps into its available knowledge.  As Sean Kane states in his book, human tradition dictates myth thus allowing them to be apart of the conversation.  The earth learns of humans just as humans learn of the earth, through the mythic conversation.  In oral cultures, storytellers nurtured this conversation by developing the imagination, the memory, and the soul and the conversation continues in the literate tradition though in a slightly varied form.

The residual influence of the oral storytelling tradition, though not as formal and revered, appears in childhood development today.  Countless studies indicate that exposing young children to aural stimulus aids development.  Reading fairytales (the modern day myth), listening to classical music, and speaking other languages work in a similar fashion today as myths did thousands of years ago.  “Sound is thus a unifying sense,” writes Walter Ong in Orality and Literacy “[…] knowledge is ultimately not a fractioning but a unifying phenomenon, a striving for harmony.  Without harmony, an interior condition, the psyche is in bad health” (71-72). “Sound […] exists only when it’s going out of existence” (Ong 90). It is up to the imagination to comprehend something that only exists instantaneously.  The imagination must connect a sound to a concrete object or visualize a sound as an action.  While the imagination processes sound, memory stores it and the soul critiques the whole experience resulting in the cognitive process. Reasonably, exposure to aural stimulus begins the development of the “unifying phenomenon” called knowledge through the development of the imagination and memory just as myths did millennia ago. 

Today, people rarely sit down with a storyteller and listen to myths about the dangers of the world.  Very few cultures continue to deify oral storytellers because of their position as knowledge transfers between earth and human and vise versa.  None-the-less, knowledge still comes from a divine mind created through a trinity of the imagination, the memory, and the soul.  In oral cultures, the primary method of gaining this knowledge was oral storytelling, thus myth and mythtelling held ultimate importance.  Today, aural stimulus builds knowledge and remains inextricably connected to memory, imagination, and soul. Humans still rely on myths and orality to convey knowledge as the basic workings of the brain remains unchanged since the time of oral cultures.  The human instinct of learning has preserved myth as myths offer the most effective method of understanding the lessons of the world.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

First round of presentations

Just wanted to say good job to all of the first round of presenters including myself.  To the "Maps" group, awesome presentation. The entire story flowed like a singular myth.  I really couldn't see where one story line ended and the other began.  I would love to see the entire think posted somewhere for another more in-depth read through.  (I am of the literate tradition after all).   I especially liked Sutter's telling of the myth from the dogs perspective.  An interesting question, "Who owns who?."  Well done to everyone of that group.  I believe your presentation was an excellent way to teach the material from the chapter.


And now a bit more on "Boundaries" chapter 3.

Not only is the "boundary" an important part of the mythic formula for oral cultures, sometimes it is the only part of the myth.  What I mean is, the "boundary" explains the difference from that which is comprehendible to an oral culture and that which is unknown.  The "boundary" is where an entity contacts the outer world.  Kane writes "If one thinks of the human body as a bounded entity, one has an idea of what boundary permits and does not permit.  Exchange with the world is made at the mouth, nose, ears, eyes, anus, sexual organs, and the skin itself. (103)" A boundary "segregates the world of the mysterious others from the world human beings have some control over (102)."  But its at these "boundaries"  where the cross of information takes place.  To an oral culture, it is unknown if a plant is safe to eat until someone tries it.  This trial and error taught people how to survive in the world through very primitive methods of data collection.  This interaction across the physical boundary of the mouth between the outside world and the body spawned myths about safe berries and roots to eat in the environment.

Another important aspect of "boundary" is framing.  By having boundaries in myth, it became clear to oral culture to separate different types of knowledge.  The forest edge framed the knowledge of the forest.  As did the sea-surface or the entrance to a cave.  Often times these boundaries would have a gate keeper to serve as a reminder to switch frames of knowledge when passing from zone to zone.

As we noted in our presentation, the oral tradition of boundary still holds an incredible influence on literature today.  Its important to note, that in the oral tradition more so than today, the emphasis was as much on the boundary as on the knowledge acquired from the other-side.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Because I can't Quite escape the subject...More on Devine Memory, Imagination, Soul

Frances Yates pg. 257

"Since the divine mind is universally present  in the wold of nature (continues Bruno in the Seal of Seals) the process of coming to know the divine mind must be through the reflection of the images of the world of sense within the mens.  Therefore the function of the imagination of ordering the images in memory is an absolutely vital one in the cognitive process. Vital and living images will reflect the vitality and life of the world--and he has in mind both magically vitalized astral images and the living striking images of the 'Ad Herennian' memory rule."

continuing on to pg. 259

"The art of memory has become in Giordano Bruno's occult transformation of it, a magico-religious technique, a way of becoming joined to the soul of the world as part of the Hermetic mystery cult. When the Thirty Seals of memory are broken, this is the 'secret' revealed in the Seal of Seals"

Ok so this is just a quick sampling of quotes about my favorite topic of this course, memory, imagination, and soul.  The end of chapter 11 is littered with quotes in support of the trinity.  More importantly, the process described by Yates finally connects Bruno back to the original thoughts of the Platonic and Aristotalian view of the art of memory.  However, Bruno tends to be more in the camp of Plato. Like Plato, Bruno sees memory, imagination, and soul as the trinity that grants man limitless power of knowledge.

Bruno's memory system joins the human soul with the world. "As the world is satid to be the image of God, so Trismegistus does not fear to call man the image of the world... man is the 'great miracle' ... his mens is divine."

I don't even have to make any sort of argument, the text speaks for itself.  Memory is the divine gift.  God made man in his image.  If God is all knowing one could assume that power was transfered upon man along with his image.  Through memory man becomes God.  

Further more, all knowledge is rooted in Memory, imagination, and soul.  "The vision of the Poet, the Painter, and the Philosopher as all fundamentally the same, all painters of images in fantasy, like Zeuxis who paints the memory images, expressed by the one as poetry, by the other as painting, by the third as thought" (253).   Thus we are all equally divine as the knowledge of the divine all comes from the same place.  And its this knowledge that unites us all and unites us to the world in which we live. The world, in Bruno's tradition, is not some ownable/ conquerable hunk of rock but the root of knowledge and another being with which to share knowledge.  The method man uses to hold this conversation with the world is MYTH! 

--Enter Kane
 
I really wish I could more clearly align my thoughts on this topic and layout some linear and comprehensible narration of my thoughts rather than the clumps of jibberish.  I will do some serious work on this for my paper. Maybe I can make a bit more sense of all of this